Joe O'Toole (Independent)

As with Senator Fitzgerald, I will not raise the obvious issue either except to note it was a very expensive way to lose 15 stone from the weight of the parliamentary party for "Operation Transformation". We must look at one issue very carefully. I hesitate to disagree with Senator Fitzgerald, but it is not true to say the Government came in here and said credit would flow after NAMA. We debated it for a full hour on the night and the issue was raised time and again on these benches. I said repeatedly that it will not allow credit to flow. I pointed out the objective of NAMA in the Bill in respect of this issue and I made it clear the Minister could not insist on credit flowing. It was never going to happen. We said time and again from these benches that it would raise the tier one assets that were required.

There were reasons NAMA was good and reasons why there might be questions about it, but it is not fair to say this was a selling point. It was a selling point for the media and for many on that side of the House. Senator Fitzgerald is correct in so far as the other side of the House tried to indicate to us that it would lead to increased credit flow, and it might do so in the long term, but not in the short term, which was the real issue.

The respective positions of the trade union movement and the Government were raised here last week, and Senators asked why both sides could not sort things out. I do not know the answer to that question. I know there is a total loss of trust and confidence, and I think Senators on the other side of the House should ask that question in their parliamentary party meetings and not in here. Many of us made serious attempts to look at the Government's need to reduce spending by €3 billion, and to make many other changes. The Government was offered the opportunity to make €3 billion of savings on the basis that those savings would be taken immediately with pay cuts and would be there until such time as they could be maintained permanently, which would be done through a reduction of numbers in the public service by 15,000 to 20,000 through increased productivity, efficiency and a transformation in the public sector.

It was the best deal ever offered to the Government, but it walked away from it for reasons I or the trade unions do not understand. We are now seeing bushfires around the country, which are a reflection of people's anger. People ask me whether trade unions clearly want industrial action at this time, and the answer is clearly "No". It is total madness to be looking for industrial action, but people are attempting to express their anger in all sorts of weird ways. The Government should take a stand on this. Fine Gael is very clear as it thought it was a good deal and it decided that it would enter negotiations. It is a belt and braces job. The Government cannot lose as it gets its €3 billion forever if it does it this way, whereas now it is faced with a situation in which it must look for €3 billion for the following year in the next budget. The only way this could have been done was to change the public sector, reducing the numbers working there and getting associated savings. I would appreciate a debate on this and related matters, but I think they should be discussed internally in the first place.